ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 149 



tutions in themselves, but of them all in respect to their methods 

 of growth and the means by which they have been* developed 

 and are still developing. This is a study which many are pur- 

 suing with eagerness and delight ; and the need of a name for it 

 clearly separating it from other kindred studies is every day more 

 apparent. 



It is my purpose to present in this paper a brief chapter in this 

 science, following out and perhaps to some extent repeating some of 

 the thoughts expressed in a paper presented to the Society two years 

 ago,^' in which I discussed the nature of the earliest human inven- 

 tions, the original germs out of which they grew, and the steps and 

 processes by which they were evolved or elaborated. Speculative 

 as some of my suggestions may have been as to the nature of these 

 primitive inventions, nevertheless the nature of the processes by 

 which they were made is so inherent in all arts that it cannot 

 be regarded as in any degree speculative. Possibly the inven- 

 tions pointed out were not actually the first contrived by man, but 

 whatever were the first, the way described is beyond doubt the way 

 in which they were arrived at. 



I propose in the course of this paper to discuss the development 

 of the stone hatchet in its most finished form; but before doing so 

 it is necessary to inquire into the nature of invention and some of 

 the general principles it follows. Lying absolutely at the bottom of 

 such principles are the following postulates, the A B C of Eurematics : 

 Given any artificial implement or product, we must assume — ist, 

 that there was a time T.ohen it did not exist; 2d, that before it existed 

 there must have been a creature capable of producini^ it ; and 3d, that 

 such creature before producing it must have been conscious of needing 

 it, or must have luxd tt.se for it. 



There can be no orderly discussion of the genesis of any art 

 without recognizing the truth of these postulates at every step. 

 Questions may arise upon resultant or collateral propositions, but, 

 admitting all that can possibly be claimed for accident as an ele- 

 ment in invention, these propositions are not to be questioned. 

 They are fundamental, and no logical consequences that flow from 

 them can be evaded. 



The first proposition, that before any artificial product existed 



*An Inquiry into the Origin of Invention. Vol. 11, Trans. Anthrop. Soc, 

 Washington. 1883. 



